Purchasing a wireless music solution is a great investment for your living space whether it is your home or office. Not only is it great for entertaining guests, livening up the space or creating an inviting atmosphere for clients, a multi room audio system can do it all. You can listen to the same music in various rooms or simply play different music in different rooms. Sounds easy enough? Thats because it is. With your favorite HEOS speaker and the simple HEOS app its easy to connect to music. So now that youve made the plunge, it is time to decide which of the 9 music services are best for your HEOS music streaming devices. After all, your ability to liven the mood and selection of music is largely dependent on these. Read below for a brief overview.

Tidal

One of the music streaming service industrys newbies is Tidal, the high fidelity music streaming service offered by rapper and entrepreneur Jay-Z. Although there is a $9.99 per month fee for the subscription, the highlight to is the featured artists own Tidal. There is a higher subscription fee if users would like the option to use its high resolution audio streaming ($19.99 per month). The service is big on exclusives. The service promises that their subscribers will be provided first access to music before other services. If your interest is making sure artists get compensated for their music, this is the service for you.

Spotify

This is a fan favorite for a few reasons. First, you can connect your Spotify account to Facebook account, making it easy to connect and share your favorite tunes with your friends and follow artists as well. Secondly, the user-interface is not only easy to use but its clean design makes it easy to navigate. You can subscribe for free and your music will shuffle with some advertisements or you can opt for the Premium service at a cost of $9.99 per month. This option is ad-free, allows you skip music without any limits or restrictions. You can organize your music files, making Spotify a one-stop shop for all of your music needs. Also, based on the music you have listened to the past,

iHeartRadio

With over 1,500 live radio stations (including talk radio) from across the United States as well customizing stations by music genre or artist, this music streaming service stands out. With a 15 million song catalog, this app plays ad-free. Unfortunately, you cannot choose the song of your choice like you can with other apps, however the more you like and dislike songs by way of a thumbs up or thumbs down, it can certainly begin to customize your stations.

Sirius XM

Satellite radio is not restricted to your vehicle. Sirius XM an all access package lets you tune in via your HEOS app. Wherever you go, take 72 commercial free stations with you. Listen to NPR while youre getting ready for work in the mornings or imagine yourself in the baseball stands while your favorite sportscaster gives you a play-by-play of the game.

Pandora

An oldie but always a goodie. Powered by the Music Genome Project, a music recommendation service powered by the users music genre or artist selection. There are two options: The free service and the paid service. The free version is sponsored by ads. The version without advertisements is available for a fee of $3.99 per month .

There are nine services available on the HEOS app, others to consider are Rhapsody, tunein, rdio and Soundcloud. Listening to ones music library via a HEOS music streaming device is easy no matter your listening preference. The HEOS app lets you connect to the top music streaming services available. The toughest decision youll have to make is which one to choose from.

About the Author: Ellen Parker is a writer based out of St. Louis, Missouri. She is a technology writer with an emphasis in digital trends including wireless audio systems. She is a graduate of Washington University and is a published author. Visit

There are three methods of appraising the resale value of residential real estate: the comparative-sales approach, the cost approach, and the income approach. The comparative-sales approach uses recent sales of similar properties in the market because comparable sales reflect the behavior of typical buyers in the marketplace. The cost approach determines market value by calculating the replacement cost of an identical structure plus the cost of the land or lot upon which the house would sit. The income approach determines market value by analyzing market rents of comparable properties and applies the gross rent multiplier of expected rents. Most lenders give the greatest weight to the comparable sales approach when establishing market value before applying any loan-to-value limitations to the loan amount. The income approach is generally only considered for non-owner occupied homes. The three-test approach to appraising market value as used during the Great Housing Bubble is fraught with risk and is seriously flawed.

The comparative-sales approach reinforces the delusive behavior and irrational exuberance of a financial mania. If everyone is overpaying for real estate, the comparative-sales approach simply enables greater fools to continue overpaying for real estate. Since market prices for houses which serve as loan collateral fall to fundamental valuations based on income after the financial mania runs its course, mortgages originated based on the comparative-sales approach have a great deal of market risk not reflected in the pricing of collateralized debt obligations based on the underlying mortgage loans.

The cost approach has an even greater level of market risk. The cost of a structure may represent a relatively small percentage of the market value of real estate in high-value markets. In some of the most overvalued markets during the bubble, the replacement cost of the structure may have been $250,000 while the value of the underling land was $450,000; however, since the market value of land is a residual calculation based on the market value of the property, the value of the land cannot be determined independently of the house situated on it. Either the comparative-sales approach or the income approach must first be applied to establish the market value of the property before any calculation of the market value of the land can be determined. In short, since the cost approach is dependent upon another valuation method, it is not useful as an independent method of property valuation. Also, since the valuation of land is extremely sensitive to small changes in the valuation of the property, the cost approach is misleading with respect to the valuation of residential real estate.

The only reliable method for the valuation of residential real estate is the income approach, and it is the only approach that is widely ignored by the lending community. It has been demonstrated in previous residential market bubbles in California and in major metropolitan areas in other states that once a price decline begins, prices fall to fundamental valuations based on income and rent. The reason for this is that once the speculative investment incentive is removed from the market, buyers do not support prices until there is a new reason for them to buy: they can save money versus renting.

Comparative rents are the fundamental valuation of residential real estate. Mortgage default loss risk is low only when market prices are in line with comparative rents or when market prices are increasing. Default loss risk is low when prices are in line with rents because a property can be converted from owner-occupied to a rental unit and the payment can still be covered. Default loss risk is low when prices are rising because a borrower experiencing financial difficulty can always sell the property to repay the loan. Unfortunately, once market prices increase above the level of comparative rents, they endure a period of decline back to comparative rent levels; therefore, if lenders continue to use the comparative-sales approach, they will enjoy a temporary period of low market risk while prices increase and another painful period of losses when prices decrease.

As was demonstrated in the aftermath of the Great Housing Bubble, these periods of lender losses can imperil the entire banking and financial system. The only way to prevent the pain of loss is to recognize the end-game risks when prices are increasing and choose not to participate in that lending environment. Many lenders did not participate in the crazy lending of the Great Housing Bubble, and they were not significantly damaged in the aftermath; however, the hunger for mortgage loans from the CDO market compelled many lenders to participate or get buried by their competitors. The only real market-based solution to the problem of originating bad loans must come from the CDO market.Lawrence Roberts